Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Certain tenements in Edmburgh being apprised from John Ker, first by William Cuningham, and thereafter by Sarah Maxton; in the competition betwixt them, it was alleged by Maxton, That she ought to be preferred, because her apprising was allowed conform to the act of Parliament, and Cuningham's apprising (though prior) was not allowed, and so null. It was answered That the not allowance does not infer a nullity, but only hinders the preference of the first apprising to a posterior apprising first allowed; so that all that can be thence concluded is, that neither apprising should be preferred, but that both should come in pari passu.
The Lords found both the apprisings to come in pari passu.
Stair, v. 2. p. 123.
*** See 17th July 1668, Stewart against Murray, No 80. p. 8384., voce Litigious.
